Agenda item

This report updates the Committee of the risks, controls, assurances and management action orientated to manage organisational level risks.

Michael Sloniowski, Principal Consultant- Risk Management, introduced the report, which set out risk management activity. Key updates included the completion of the IT Business Continuity project, work on Tri-Borough governance and the integration of the Housing and Regeneration department’s risks to the corporate register and standard. In response to a question from Councillor Ginn regarding the integration of social care, Michael Sloniowski asked that Councillor Ginn write to him with the details of the question.

With regards to an issue with HMRC identified as a potential area of risk, Jane West, Director of Finance and Corporate Services, clarified that the issue had been in relation to the treatment of VAT payable on one of the Council’s partner organisations, and that this had now been resolved in the Council’s favour.

Councillor Murphy asked whether there was a risk to the regeneration of King Street from an adverse Mayoral decision. Michael Sloniowski said that there was hierarchy within each risk, which would be reflected in the register when and if appropriate.

Councillor Iggulden asked whether political risk was taken into account. Michael Sloniowski said that reputational risk to the Council was considered in compiling the risk register.

SheelaSelvajothy, trade union representative, asked whether staff morale was considered as a risk, given the reductions in staffing numbers. She said that the trade unions were encountering difficulties with the redeployment of staff, with agency staff being retained.

Michael Sloniowski said that the issue was captured as a part of the Successful Cultural Change risk. He said that staff mental health was considered by the corporate Safety Committee; Jane West said that counselling services were also available to all staff, and said that she would arrange for this information to be circulated again. With regards to the issues raised regarding redeployment, she said that the adjudication panel which reviewed all restructuring proposals checked that agency staff were not retained if possible, but that she would look into any specific concerns referred to her.

Councillor Botterill asked whether the profile for risk was normal. Michael Sloniowski said that it was, given the Council’s appetite for risk. As such, given the severity of the risks the Council faced, increases in likelihood were of greater concern.

Eugenie White noted the annual report on complaints submitted by Michael Sloniowksi as an appendix to the report, and the improvements detailed. She said that complaints was a key issue for the Council, and that, in her experience, the response from service officers was often unsatisfactory, with response to Stage 2 and 3 complaints often identical to those offered at Stage 1. She asked what opportunities executive and non-executive members had to review complaints.

Councillor Iggulden and the Chairman suggested that ward Councillors could be informed of Stage 2 and Stage 3 responses, whilst Councillor Murphy said that the Council’s culture was not service-orientated, and was often process driven.

Councillor Botterill said that, in the area for which he held Cabinet responsibility, many of the complaints that reached Stage 2 and 3 were in relation to parking. As such, they related to an area that was process driven, with high penalties a further contributory factor to the number and nature of complaints received. He added that the Council’s responsiveness was highly improved

Jane West said that she would feed back to officers on the issues raised. The Chairman suggested that the Committee could receive a report on the complaints process at a future meeting.

RESOLVED THAT

(i)                 The report be noted, and;

(ii)               That the Committee’s concerns regarding complaints be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Board.